| Final Order / Judgement | BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM CACHAR :: SILCHAR Consumer Case No. 16 of 2014 Jabarut Alom Choudhury,……………. ......……………………… Complainant V/S- M/S. Tahrin Traders, Represented by its Proprietor, Safiqul Islam Laskar, P.O.-Bagpur, P.S.-Silchar Dist. Cachar, Assam, …………… ………………….......................……. Opp. Party Present: - Sri Bishnu Debnath, President District Consumer Forum, Cachar, Silchar. Mrs. Chandana Purkayastha, Member District Consumer Forum, Cachar, Silchar. Shri Kamal Kumar Sarda, Member District Consumer Forum, Cachar, Silchar. Appeared :- Md. Zia Uddin Laskar, Advocate for the complainant. None of appeared for the OP. Date of Evidence…………………….. 03-09-2014 Date of argument…………………… 23-03-2017 Date of judgment………………….. 01-04-2017 JUDGMENT AND ORDER (Sri Bishnu Dednath, President) - This is a complaint case U/S 12 of the Consumer Protection Act for replacement of the Kitchen Modular or in alternative recovery of an amount of Rs.1,80,000/- with compensation and cost.
- Brief facts:- Jabarut Alom Choudhury, Son of Late Sawkat Ali Choudhury of village Uttarkrishnapur Part-I, Silchar (hereinafter referred as Complainant) being consumer, purchased a Kitchen Modular from M/s. Tahrin Traders, Sonai Road, Silchar, represented by its proprietor Safiqul Islam Laskar son of Late Majijur Hoque Laskar of Bagpur Part-I, Silchar (hereinafter referred as O.P) for Rs.1,80,000/- vide Invoice No.TT/167/13 14 dated 16/08-2013. The Modular product has been fitted in the Kitchen of the Complainant as per instruction of the Complainant, but after 2/3 months of its installation, the Complainant notice that drawers of the said Modular products were defective with full of stains and granite stone fitted on the Modular product also broken in to pieces. Fitting of nut-bolts, screws, etc. were coming out automatically from the product. Accordingly, the Complainant informed the O.P. over mobile phone and also visited the O.P personally and requested to repair the product but O.P did not pay heed to his requests.
- Ultimately, the complainant had to issue Advocate Notice on 24-03-2014 to the O.P. In the Notice he described the detail of disservice in respect of Modular Product fitted to his Kitchen and expressed his intention to lodge complaint before the Consumer Forum. The OP did not repair the product for the reasons best known to him. Rather, the OP replied through his advocate letter inter-alia a fact that the Complainant did not clear the balance amount of Rs.84,000/-. In his reply he also denied all the allegations and also took the plea that there was no warranty of the product.
- Under the above circumstances finding no alternative, the Complainant filed the instant case narrating the above facts are disservice on the part of the O.P. and prayed for directing the O.P either to replace the Product or in alternative repay the amount of Rs.1,80,000/- with compensation of Rs.5,0000/- and also cost of the proceeding.
- On receiving the complaint the Forum issued notice to the O.P for W/S. O.P received the notice and took adjourned dates but did not file any W/S. Accordingly, the case has been proceeded exparte, vide order dated 02-08-2014.
- During the hearing the complainant submitted his examination-in-chief with supporting an affidavit and also exhibited some documents. Exhibit -1 Tax Invoice, Exhibit-2 is receipt, Exhibit-3 is lawyer notice and Exhibit 4 is reply of O.P through his engaged lawyer. The O.P did not take part in the hearing.
- I have heard argument of the learned advocate of the complainant in absence of the learned advocate of the O.P because he has not turned up at the time of hearing. I have also the perused deposition of the complainant and all exhibited documents.
- In this case, the complainant took a plea that he purchased a kitchen modular for Rs.1,80,000/- from the O.P. and exhibited some documents to establish a fact that he purchased a modular product for kitchen on 16th Aug 2013 from the OP. Ext.-1 is the Tax Invoice cum receipt, Ext.-2 is also copy of the Ext.-1 both the above exhibited documents proved the fact that the Complainant purchased the Modular product for his kitchen as stated on 16-08-2013 from the OP. He also deposed orally the fact regarding the disservice of the modular product fitted in his kitchen.
- The Ext. 4 revealed the fact that the complainant purchased the modular product from the OP. It is also admitted fact that the price of the kitchen modular is of Rs.1,80,000.00. The said admitted fact is revealed from Ext. 4. Therefore, I have been convinced that Ext. 1 and Ext. 2 are reliable documents in connection with purchasing of the kitchen modular. The Ext. 4 revealed another fact that the complainant formally informed the OP regarding disservice of the OP in respect of the kitchen modular. The complainant though informed but the OP denied the aforesaid disservice. If this is treated as defense plea of the OP, it is the onus of the OP to establish the plea that the kitchen modular was functioning properly but fail to adduce any iota of evidence to establish the onus. On the other hand, the complainant has exhibited relevant documents and convinced me that the kitchen modular was not functioning properly as stated in the complaint petition. Therefore, in my considered view it is justified to bring the instants case before this forum. Hence, the complainant has entitled a relief as stated below.
- Of course, it is in my judicial knowledge that a modular kitchen product which has been fitted in the kitchen of the complainant cannot be fitted to any other kitchen because of it is a tailored made product which cannot be fitted in any other kitchen but the modular product is repairable. Hence, for the ends of justice the prayer for replacement of the modular product fitted in the kitchen of the complainant or in alternative a direction to the OP to repay the price of the modular product are not granted. Rather, the OP is directed to repair the modular product fitted in the kitchen of the Complainant within 45(Forty Five) days from today.
- If the OP is fail to repair the Modular product fitted in the kitchen of the Complainant within the stipulated period, the complainant may approach before this forum as per procedure established by law to execute the order. Further, the OP is directed to pay an amount of Rs.5,000.00 (Rupees five thousand) as nominal compensation to the Complainant for his sufferings due to disservice of the OP. I have determined the above compensation of Rs.5,000.00 by applying my prudent mind because there is no specific evidence available in the record to determine adequate quantum of compensation. Of course, the OP is also liable to pay a lump-sum amount of Rs.5,000.00 (Rupees five thousand) only to the Complainant as cost of the proceedings. Thus, the OP is liable to pay total amount of Rs.10,000.00 (Rupees ten thousand) only within the stipulated period of 45 days from today. In default of payment of the above amount of Rs.10,000.00 (Rupees ten thousand) only within the stipulated period of 45 days from today the OP will be further liable to pay interest on the above amount at the rate of 10% per annum till realisation of the full awarded amount.
- Accordingly, the case is disposed of on merits. Supply the copy of Judgment to the parties free of cost.
| |
